How could High End audio be improved?

A quote from an above post, "being drawn to the hiend is synonomous with being drawn to feel more beauty in music". Does this mean those not involved in high end audio are not drawn to feel more beauty in music? Asa, I guess I'm questioning your use of the word synonomous.

Onhwy, "Does this mean those not involved in high end audio are not drawn to feel more beauty in music?" Reading Asa as a 3rd party, the answer is, "probably not". It doesn't follow from his words that, not using hi-end as a tool in my pursuit of beauty in music I am relinquishing that pursuit altogether. Asa's comment looks mono-valent.

Going back to the first chapter of Twl's question, I would like to idealise on how High End could be improved: if it could be offered as a SERVICE (by manufacturers & dealers). The service would be, "bringing beautiful sound to your home". This is achieved through meticulous combination of h/ware (machines, wires, etc). Following rules of personal taste, budgets, etc., of course.

The fact that there is so much discussion of h/ware combinations indicates, after all, that information is lacking from the primary sources: manufacturers & dealers...

Hello Ohn. No, being drawn to beauty in the hiend does not mean that if you are not in the hiend that you can't see beauty. However, if you are drawn to beauty in general, then I think you would also be drawn to the beauty of music, and, therefore, the hiend.

Hence, my inquiry about how we reach those people that may already be drawn to beauty in other areas but don't know about the hiend. This was an attempt to draw the parameters of marketing towards a goal not based on stimulation of the personality (create a new style: you need this! adverts) but DIRECTED to areas where such beauty-drawn minds tend to congregate; don't change minds (because you can't teach someone to appreciate a sunset; you cann't teach receptivity to beauty), but locate them.

The former strategy seeks to stimulate minds to action though argument, the latter admits that the creation of the beauty-drawn mind is internally driven (not subject to stimulation by external in advertising context)and not subject to being changed through persuasion, and,therefore, the strategy must be to find them already formed or on that progression.

Unless, of course, you also think that there might be a way to catalyze the collective mind towards receptivity, which as I've argued before, necessarlity involves catalyzing the "letting go" of one's attachment to the power of thinking over things. Ohn, how do you think we should do that?

So, back to mechanics: where are those minds drawn to beauty yet are not in the hiend?

What other "hobbies" exist where the urge is towards beauty of that which is being experienced as phenomenon?

An ad for hiend in Wine Spectator?

Two questions:
1-Is high end audio a thing of beauty?
2-If not, is high end audio potentially a thing of beauty?

High end audio is just like anything else, some people like it and some people don't. Some people like it because it is technical, some people hate it for that reason. Some people like it because it is expensive, some people hate it for the same reason. Some people like to show off their electronics, some people don't. Some people would pay anything for reproduced sound, some people prefer live music or rather allocate funds elsewhere.

The market speaks for itself.

Ofcourse, would there be more audiophiles if more people were exposed to it? Yes. But, you will also have more people who think audio is an idiotic hobby as well.

After reading so much about aculturlization of audiophelia and other trends, personas, and ideologies, I'd just have to regress to the most used and annoying quote I've read on this forum which is "just enjoy the music."

Oh Viggen, don't rain on the beauty parade, especially if what you offer is a radically subjective justification!

Really though, yes, people have different opinions - I think we are aware of that - but that fact itself doesn't translate into the proposition that, therefore, all opinions are equal. Certainly, there are some guys who only care about the equipment - whose minds are so orientated towards an attachment to things that it overwhelms any tendancy to be drawn into the music, as in, an imbalance between thing and mind - but I don't think we should tell ourselves that that way is the optimal means of experiencing meaning in the music. I can't imagine you beleiving this either, even though being equal/equal has a good sound to it in a crowd.

Radical egalitarianism enables one to proceed into a group and judge them by saying they shouldn't form opinions where one way is differentiated from another, but this is disingenuous: some truths are truer than others, all knowledge is built on that proposition. Moreover, the opinion that all opinion is equal is a performative error; in making that argument you disprove the argument.

Second, the hiend is not a "thing." People who are attached to the power of their mind to objectifying reality many times make this error; they reduce mind to an object - science has been doing it since Descartes.

The hiend is a group of minds who listen with those minds to sound-phenomenon, again, it is not a "thing". As long as you assume its some-thing "out there" - like an object I can manipulate - and not your own mind, you won't understand, and will ask questions unaware of the materialist assumption underlying and limiting what answer you can potentially derive.

All are equal in potential to "hear" beauty, but some choose to limit themselves in the assumptions they bring to the listening.

Again, the question is: how can we find more minds that have seen already that beauty isn't a thing?